MANOHAR PATEL Vs. DIGAMBAR NAIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainant/respondent agreed to purchase one tractor make John Deere model 5310 alongwith some accessories worth Rs. 10,000/- and a Balkar 525 harvester. He also agreed to purchase one cultivator and one trailor. The grievance of the complainant is that the harvester make Balkar 525 was not delivered to him despite the petitioner having been paid through the banker of the complainant from which a loan had been raised by the complainant. The quotation for sale of the above referred articles was given by the petitioner on 02.02.2009 and the invoice in favour of the complainant was issued thereafter. Since the petitioner could not deliver the harvester sold to the complainant, he executed an undertaking dated 10.12.2009 in the presence of two witnesses undertaking to deliver the same to him by first week of March 2010 alongwith interest on Rs. 6 lacs, at the bank interest rate. However, the petitioner failed to deliver the harvester make Balkar 525 to the complainant. Being aggrieved, the complainant approached the concerned District Forum by way of a complaint.

(2.) The complaint was resisted by the petitioner primarily on the ground that since the harvester of make Balkar was not available, the complainant had later agreed to accept the harvester make Sant Mack at the same price.

(3.) The District Forum, vide its order dated 29.08.2012, to the extent it pertains to the harvester, directed the petitioner to refund Rs. 6 lacs to the complainant alongwith interest 9% per annum from the date of the order till the date of payment. The petitioner was also directed to pay Rs. 10,000/- as compensation and Rs. 2,000/- as cost of litigation.